Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add RockyHong/super-bootstrap --skill triage-reportgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RockyHong/super-bootstrapWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/rockyhong/super-bootstrap/triage-report)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rockyhong/super-bootstrap/triage-report"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rockyhong/super-bootstrap/triage-report/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rockyhong/super-bootstrap/triage-report"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rockyhong/super-bootstrap/triage-report.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00151 | $0.00903 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00060 | $0.00361 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00181 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00090 |
Grade A, and why
triage-report scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 16d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 40 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Triage Report — Review-Queue Drain
The scanner answered is this hit real by its own rule; this lane answers is it worth acting on, and where does it route. Producer-agnostic — fires on artifact presence in .review/, regardless of which scanner wrote the report. The thinking runs in the triage-report subagent (agents/triage-report.md, model: sonnet); this skill is the dispatch shell + absorption protocol.
Target resolution
Argument is an optional report path. Without one, resolve from the queue — the directory IS the queue:
.review/*.md glob |
Behavior |
|---|---|
| 0 reports | Report "review queue clean", exit. |
| 1 report | Dispatch it. |
| N reports | Sequential, oldest-first — one dispatch per report. Later runs dedup against the cards earlier runs just promoted; never merge reports into one dispatch. |
Execution — per report
- Dispatch:
Agenttool,subagent_type: "triage-report", prompt = the report path + scan date if known. Nothing else — no gateway priors on which findings matter. - Review the sheet (gateway): coverage line must hold (findings = verdicts), and the
decisions.md § Closed Forkssource line must be present; a sheet failing either re-dispatches the agent on the same report. A— unresolved: {cause}source line surfaces to the user before absorb — thedocs/decisions.mdfix is theirs. Dismiss is the lossy verdict — a dismissal whose rationale doesn't beat the scanner's stated reasoning bounces back asneeds-investigation. - Absorb:
- promote → one batched
/super-bootstrap:logpass carrying the agent's draft claim blocks. Rows land raw; the pipeline rolls at normal pickup. - patch → doc-mechanical edits only, landed per CLAUDE.md § Dispatch (gateway inline, or dispatched by closure). Anything wider re-verdicts as promote.
- dup → fold any new-fact into the
/super-bootstrap:logbatch — rides the log door's amend path (dedup surfaces for the user's pick; the Amendment lands on the owning card). - needs-investigation → the single question rides
/super-bootstrap:triagewhen it names a card; otherwise an investigate-only probe dispatch. Verdicts return to step 2.
- promote → one batched
- Close out — only after every finding holds a terminal verdict and every patch has landed: delete the report; the deletion + a dispositions summary ride the session's envelope commit (dismissal rationales survive in git log).
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 16d ago Changed 3df0d1943c8d
- 1mo ago First seen · 40 lines · 151 tokens per session scan A d23b5c51a0d0
triage-report is a skill published in the GitHub repository RockyHong/super-bootstrap (3 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 151 tokens to every session and 903 once invoked, about $0.0006 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
apex-review
Cross-cutting review of recent work — catches gaps between specialists. Use when asked to "review what we built", "check the work", "pre-launch review", or after completing a significant chunk of work.
spine-review
API and backend code review — REST conventions, auth, validation, error handling, pagination, rate limiting, test coverage. Use when asked to "review this API", "code review", "review backend", or "pre-launch backend check".
github-pr-review
Handles PR review comments and feedback resolution. Use when user wants to resolve PR comments, handle review feedback, fix review comments, address PR review, check review status, respond to reviewer, verify PR readiness, review PR comments, analyze review feedback, evaluate PR comments, assess review suggestions, or…
github-pr-creation
Creates GitHub Pull Requests with automated validation and task tracking. Use when user wants to create PR, open pull request, submit for review, or check if ready for PR. Analyzes commits, validates task completion, generates Conventional Commits title and description, suggests labels. NOTE - for merging existing…
test-audit
Audit test suites for T1-T4 violations using AST analysis, mock detection, and multi-stage synthesis. Invoke when user asks to audit tests, check test quality, find mock violations, review test effectiveness, or inspect test suites for over-mocking. Triggers automatic rewrites when quality gates fail.
code-review
Comprehensive code review with distinct aspect based sections. Use when reviewing code, checking for security issues, finding type safety problems, auditing code quality, or when user asks to review code, PRs or changes. Three-phase workflow runs static tools, LLM judgment, and writes diagnostic log.